For-profit charters remain a nonstarter

OUR VIEW

It's very disheartening to see the way so much of the legislation that is introduced in the General Assembly this year shows little thought for the implications of the bill's actions. This is especially egregious when it is legislation affecting the education of Tennessee's children.

House Bill 1693/Senate Bill 1684 takes an idea - let for-profit companies run charter schools - that failed handily in the legislature last year and simply regurgitates it with no conditions or rules, apparently. Just "let for-profit companies run charter schools."

Doesn't the idea, which has a single, failed example, Tennessee Virtual Academy, as its predecessor, require further discussion and elaboration than that? It's as if Ford Motor Co. reintroduced the Pinto, with no changes, and expected people to take it out on the highway.

We appreciate Tennessee's unique position among states as a place for bold and innovative education reform. But Rep. John DeBerry and Sen. Dolores Gresham's bill suggests that our schools are fair game for any scheme that comes along. The bill has some well-padded lobbyists for out-of-state companies prowling the legislature for votes that could, if it were to become law, result in big contracts for Charter Schools USA of Florida and National Heritage Academies of Michigan.

That, in itself, is not shocking - seeking profits is what companies do. But why does the bill contain no guidelines or parameters? After all, the majority of the money that would go to pay for charters to hire these companies is from your tax dollars.

Even staunch supporters of charter schools, including Lt. Gov. Ron Ramsey, appear to be opposed to this bill. Even the Tennessee Charter School Center is neutral on this. But such a simplistic piece of legislation as this is hazardous for what it does not say, and that's why it is important to call attention to it.

Nonprofit organizations such as KIPP have done an excellent job bringing educational choices to students and parents, and it is probably attributable to a lack of distractions from the mission of making a better school experience for the students. For-profit management companies would necessarily focus on the company's bottom line. If better education were to coincide with the profit, fine. But what if it did not? A successful business sheds what is not profitable. We cannot risk any of Tennessee's schoolchildren being treated as a business loss.

DeBerry and Gresham either need to go back to the drawing board and establish some detailed ground rules or realize that this Pinto is an accident waiting to happen.

ADVERTISEMENT

Most Popular

Most Commented

More Headlines

Most Viewed

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

For-profit charters remain a nonstarter

It's very disheartening to see the way so much of the legislation that is introduced in the General Assembly this year shows little thought for the implications of the bill's actions.